Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-01-23 CC MINor • 134 COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker Absent: Also Present: Press: Citizens: January 23, 1979 7:30 P. M. None City Finance Director /Coordinator, Kriesel; City Clerk, Schnell; City Attorne), Magnuson; Superintendent of Public Works, Shelton; Public Safety Director, Abrahamson; Director of Parks & Recreation, Blekum. Consulting Engineers, Elliott, Building Inspector, Niska; Consulting Engineer, Van Wormer; Mn. Dept. of Transportation, Wikelius Stillwater Evening Gazette - Bob Liberty & Sharon Baker White Bear Free Press - Mathes Louise Johnson, Mary Emanuelson, Brad MacDonald, Monty Brine, Dick Ritzer, Gary Ritzer, Dennis Johnson, Charles Anderson, Jim Simpson, Bob Thompson INDIVIDUALS - DELEGATIONS 1. JACK HOOLEY, appeared before the City Council regarding the passing of a resolution which is a formality for the mortgage company to the bond holders for the Cub Store. He was also requesting ratification of the approval of the Joint Planning Commission action regarding the taking of 100 feet of the last lot for this project. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "RESOLUTION RELATING TO A $700,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE NOTE: AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE TI EREOF PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER 474" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 2. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodiovick, a resolution was introduced "RELATING TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPI.O;NT IN STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL PARK BY HOOLEY LAND PARTNERSHIP NO. 2; APPROVAL OF RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 4" (Involves a change in the plat - ratification of Joint Powers) AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) PETITIONS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilnan Powell, a resolution was introduced APPROVING THE PLANS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. .70 (highway 212 Frontage Road). AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 2. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ORDERING HEARING ON SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 168 - NORTH HARRIET STREET SEWER ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "PARTICIPATION IN MINNESOTA CITIES WEEK ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) (�J u I • • • F 'j • • Oft January 23, 1979 r 0 11 1 0 6 sr 4. MAYOR JUNKER stated that he was not quite ready to make the commission appointments and this will be taken care of at the next regular meeting. 5 TAXI -CAB LICENSING MR. DENNIS JOHNSON, TRANSPORTER OFFICER FOR THE HUMAN SERVICES FOR WASHING- TON COUNTY, for the handicapped and senior citizens gave a brief history as to how the transportation system came into being - approximately two years ago there was concern about transportation service for elderly people in Washington County and they polled a Countywide Task Force Group that looked at this problem for both the elderly and the handicapped throughout Washington County. About 25 citizens of Washington County served on this committee. The final recommenda- tion that the committee made was that there was a need for a special transpor- tation service for both the elderly and the handicapped through Washington County. The committee also recommended that Washington County Human Services be the organization to in effect implement this service. The Board accepted the recommendation of this committee with one contingency, that being that the County Commissioners also sanction that the Human Services should be in the business and start this transpo: tation service - specialized trnasportation service for elderly and handicapped. The County Board approved Human Services to be the agency to get this program in operation. They stated that they should on behalf of Washington County make necessary application for the funding of it, which they did to the Metropolitan Council on Aging and the Minnesota Department of Transportation - both applications were received and the recommendation was that they should be funded by both of those agencies. They also received approval from the Transportation Committee under the Metro Council and approval of the Metropolitan Transit Commission. They have met all of the policies and regulations of the various agencies and their services were implemented this past summer. CHARLES ANDERSON stated that they sent out about 1,300 questionnaires out to different Senior Citizens throughout Washington County with about 600 returns and most of them were in favor. They came to the conclusion that it was very necessary that they have this type of transportation system for Washington County. He felt that their transportation system should not affect any other transportatiun system that is now existent in Washington County. Dakota County has no problems with any other transportation system in Hastings or any other part of their county and he did not know what the problem here is. Stillwater has about 24% of the senior citizens in Washington County and the service is needed. GIB LARSON stated he uses this service twice a month to go back and forth to the Veteran's Hospital and he hoped that no one would have this service stopped. WILBUR MONSON stated that they were not here to stop the licensing of taxicabs and they are needed. He felt that possibly that we can use more than one. The transporter has a lift on it and the drivers are very courteous and help people on them for various reasons. He is on the committee for the Aging for the Metropolitan Council. LOUISE JOHNSON, Chairman of the St. Croix Valley Senior Citizens, which is the oldest Senior Citizens Group in Washington County which organized in 1952 and one of the oldest in the State. She felt that this was one of the best programs ever organized in Washington County - two big priorities for Senior Citizens in Washington County are transportation and housing and finally that we are getting some housing and these transporters are the answers to our transporation. They are primarily needed to take senior citizens and handicapped to the doctors, hospitals, dental appointments and treatment centers and everything else is secondary. DICK RITZER stated that his wife is the owner of the Stillwater Taxi Company - he felt that it was wrong to take these people to various places for lunch and wait for then and felt that this was not fair and that if what is putting him out of business. He stated that they cannot handle a lot of these people and he felt that these busses are going things that they should not be doing with the tax- payer's money and it should be stopped. He was opposed to all of these senior citizens being at the meeting this evening and the MAYOR indicated that this is an informal meeting with this group to find out just what the Transporter does and MR. RITZER stated that he was not against the Transporter - they can take care of the crippled and the handicapped. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON asked how many vehicles they had and he was informed - "three." He further asked how they made arrangements to get people to their appointments. MR. DENNIS JOHNSON explained that the parties have to call in tefore noon on the previous day to get a ride the next day - 24 hours in advance. 135 0 • • 136 • January 23, 1979 SANDY BRENDEN explained tie full details of the program and how they make reservations for the use of the service - it is available for medical reasons, social, recreational, educational, banking, grocery shopping. Their drivers have been trained to assist the handicapped and the elderly and give them good quality care when they are being transported. The transporter runs from 8 A. M. to 4:30 P. M., but sometimes the drivers do not get back to the garage until 6:00 P. M. They purchase as much of their supplies within the County as possible, such as gas, etc. (She had distributed to the Council informational sheets on their services.) MAYOR JUNKER asked if it was strictly Federally funded and he was informed that they have both Federal and State funding - matching funds. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that one of the basic reasons that the Council requested that someone appear from the department was that Mr. Ritzer or his wife indicated that there were some things that were happening with this program that should not be happening and none of the Council were basically aware of what the program was suppose to contain. He asked, 'Is the statement made by Mr. Ritzer that the Transporter was seen at the Lowell Inn and other places for lunch and dinner" and she said that she could verify that by her records, but that the residents of Croixdale do use it on occasion for such purposes and also that it can be used for social reasons and this could be one of them - this is their perogative. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK observed that there is next to nobody on those busses and asked what their volume was per day or week and SANDY replied that as of last Friday they had 402 Senior Citizens and handicapped are 50 -right now they have around 40 persons that use this service per day. MR. RITZER asked how many busses they have in town at one time - they have the dispatcher - they could have all three go through by the end of the day - in the morning they have only one bus that collects people and goes into town - the other bus is in the southern part of the County and the third bus goes in between Stillwater after the first bus has left town. MAYOR JUNKER inquired about the size of their staff and he was informed that they have a dispatcher and three drivers, a supervisor, a coordinator and they are all at the Human Services Offices. Dennis Johnson spends only 10% of his time with this service as he has two other responsibilities. are MAYOR JUNKER asked about their charges and SANDY stated that they /mandated by Title III only advertise and suggest a donation and if they so chose to put some- thing in that is their perogative. The suggested donation is 500 within the County for a one -way ride. No body will be turned away because they cannot donate. MAYOR JUNKER asked about service within the City of Stillwater and SANDY stated that they do ask the people if they do live near a bus linethey do ask them to use that service wherever possible. Also in their newspaper they print the MTC phone number, the taxi number, Valley Transit, etc. NILE KRIESEL stated that the City of Stillwater received a request from the Stillwater Taxi Company asking for some subsidation on the taxi company and after that he tried to find out if there were any funds available and it came out in the last department that he talked to it seemed to be the only one involved with this type of grant was the Transit Administration Robert Houdek, and he informed him that because Washington County Human Services received a grant in the amount that they have and that they are not operating at full capacity that there would not be any grant monies for the City of Stillwater. Is there a possibility that the Washington County Human Services could sub - contract or contract with Ritzer Taxi in some manner - is there a possibility with the funding that they are in? DENNIS JOHNSON said that there is a possibility but whether or not it could be worked out is something else. Their program director Mr. Keeley met with Mr. Ritzer once and had scheduled another meeting at which time they were going to pursue some alternatives as to how we could work cooperatively and Mr. Ritzer cancelled out on that meeting on the day before it was scheduled. MR. RITZER stated that they could not have his books and MR. JOHNSON stated that they had given him all of the information that he requested. MR. MUNSON explained the full workings of the Task Force committee -that there are going to be further funds available for these types of programs through Federal Funding. SANDY felt that it would be incorrect for Mr. Ritzer to say that he is not opposed to this program since he indicated that we were putting him out of business and they were Stan other is Hudson dispatcher for this service and Road. r c L • • • • • • of • • • • January 23, 1979 0 • L • 137 COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON asked if their log indicated whether the numbers picked up are handicapped and what the purpose of the trip is. SANDY in- dicated that it does, but that she did not have those records with her at this time. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON said that we do have a bus service - Valley Transit - do you make it a practice to pick up people on the same route as the Valley Transit p makes them up in Bayport et runs Oak wantingitotc4 come to Stillwater to shop - Tr you no house and possibleythatesomeroftthese the direct to the COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON stated then it would not be wrong to say that you are in competition with someone who operates a bus to a cerain extent and SANDY replied that they are a specialized transportation. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON added that they do not limit themselves in dealing with handicapped because they assist in taking people shopping, banking and doing social things and SANDY replied they have about 140 regular users in the Stillwater ara about half of them a are handicapped e and o their are f trained r by d the t down, Kenny Institute. MAYOR JUNKER asked if they would take a handicapped person to a daily job in the cities and the response was "no" Their schedules could not take care of this. MR. RITZER asked if they take one person at a time to St. Paul and SANDY replied that they try to get as many people as possible on the bus at any one time and she felt that Mr. Ritzer was "fishing" and he denied that. SANDY did indicate hu e bus possible oe St. Paul. morning it is possible to see 8 or 9 persons on ld thattRitUcouldabeadone when they about carry than the one passenger and there did not feel therewould be a lot of bickering. GARY RITZER stated that on Saturday afternoon he takes a whole c..c load up - five different people- he goes North Hill, South Hill, Bayport, etc. and drop them all off that there would be no way to figure out what is going through there. When they stop and walk somone to the door, the meter is clicking away. DICK RITZER stated that they would accept meters if the City wanted to purchase them and put them in, they will take them. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON did not feel that we should have the second reading of the ordinance tonite - does anyone feel that we should and the response was "no ". MR. RITZER asked what that meant and COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON add that means tht to have the second reading has and MR. RITZERswould won't e are be notified if and when . . MR. RITZER indicated that nidnight tonite they are closing the cabstand, sir. He indicated that he has had four and five meetings with the Council and last year it costed him $600.00 to get 35C out of the Council for a rate increase. He reminded the Council that they just approved a sewer increase of 317. - he was asking for 22c - his gas has gone to 73c per gallon - his insurance went up and the wages have gone up and that he and his wife do not need this - if the Council did not wish to have the cabstand closed at midnight tonite they had better make a decision and that was not a threat - they cannot operate on the basis that they are going on and coming to the Council meeting every Tuesday nite. sa d k n ew O that a the Council their would request do that and thatathey and had t RITZER this for an increase. ROGER COUNCILMAN /PETERSON stated that they had asked for financial information and t took two meetings to get that which was no fault of the Council and he did get the 35C that he requested. MAYOR MR. RITZER agreeddand Council is what he wanted and fighting. MAYOR JUNKER felt that the Taxi Company should be allowed to go with their own regulations and if the runs himself out fo business that is his business - let him charge that rate and if the people can't afford the cabs they will have to take the bus or they will have to stay home. If he cannot operate the cab at more licensesravailablet- hey ifw ill have he is too high, close they and least un, then go to him. • • • • 1 1 • X 138 January 23, 1979 MAYOR JUNKER stated that the Council has several perogatives - if you do not want him to go out of business at midnight tonite - if you don't want to give him the meters. MR. RITZER stated that he tried to sell it - can't sell it - and that he and his wife annot put any more money into it - he indicated that he was willing to give up the four licenses this evening and they would take airport runs and package delivery for the City of Stillwater Township. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that if he was sincere about giving up the licenses that would be the proper thing to do. MR. RITZER stated that he would give them up at midnight tonite and tomorrow morning the City will haul the people to work. MR. INGA BIEGING, 419 South Second Street, complained about the service that she received on a recent Sunday from the Stillwater Taxi Company and having to wait at Pine and Second for the cab. MAYOR JUNKER stated that a week ago the cab could have gone into her driveway as they would have gotten stuck, but that he did plow it today. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that it would be to Mr. Ritzer's benefit to give us the licenses if he isn't making any money, if he has got the other part - he couldn't see a man staying in business if he is not making any money and then make the licenses available to somebody else. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK questionted if he did not have a City of Stillwater license whether or not he could pick up packages within the City and MR. RITZER stated that the yellow cab and the Hudson cab comes in and picks them up - if he owned a license in another City he could pick them up and that he would be licensed in Stillwater Township. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON felt that there should be no action taken on the ordinance this evening and COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK also felt the same way. THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:30 to 8:45 P. M. 6. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON asked the Highway Department and the Engineers about the situation at Nelson Street and che response was that they had completed their studies and based on the data they have on pedestrians and traffic vehicles they could not justify putting in a traffic signal at this time. They have completed the layout that was talked about in changing the curbs around and it is in a preliminary stage. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if there would be a caution blinker or light for pedes- trians and MR. WIKELIUS stated that is a possibility and he was hopeful that this work would do more for the pedestrian traffic than anything else just giving the drivers more visibility of the pedestrians and narrowing up the crossing so that the pedestrian is not in conflict with any of the vehicles in the same period of time. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that he went down there and talked to some of the people in the Brick Alley and they were hoping very strongly that there would be some kind of pedestrian crosswalk caution sign and he also reported that there was a car parked by the pressure plate and the cars are unable to go over it so that the counter could be activated. MR. WIKELIUS stated that it recores it by 15 minute times and they can see when it is not working e-d that is why they take it for more than one day. MR. WIKELIUS stated that putting in a flashing light is possible and they would not oppose it - it would be up to the City to fund the flasher and he stated by using used equipment such as poles they could get this cost down from $10,000 to $2,000 - this would be just a flasher. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that if we had that and then the Highway Department could be aware of it and evaluate it and maybe two years down the road or 2k years they might say that there is a need for a semiphore there and we could figure on getting it. MR. WIKELIUS stated that when they are putting it in would not preclude adding another signal to it at a future time, but they cold not justify putting it in now. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, that we accept the proposal of che Highway Department to regulate traffi,: thru town providing some sort of a pedestrian crosswalk flasher be installed on the south end of town by Nelson Street corner. L a • • 1 • • m DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON stated that the argument in favor of this is for the safety of the pedestrian as well as the movement of traffic and he did not feel that without a stop and go light that we will not accomplish all of the safety of the pedestrian as you will by having one in there and did not feel that a flasher will do it. He felt that the whole proposal should be tied to a stop and go light in there on Main and Nelson. He felt that if they had taken traffic counts last summer and visible observation of the pedestrian traffic - t'.'e confusion of traffic and parking down there, he felt that it would have been found to be justified - with the parking lot that will be in- stalled there, that will eliminate some of the confusion of parking that we have. COUNCILMAN POWELL felt thatMe did not act on it now, we stand to lose the whole program. MAYOR JUNKER asked if the speed limit f om the Highway man to the City Limits ® could be changed to 30 miles per hour and MR. WIKELIUS stated that they could look at it - just changing the speed limit sign doesn't change the speed of the traffic and unless something else changes so that they feel restricted, the driver will not adhere to the speed limit just because there is a number on a sign. COUNCILMAN POWELL & MAYOR JUNKER felt that if the sign said "30" then the City could ticket them. 00 COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON asked the members of the Retail Council that were present as to their feelings as to the East and West as to this proposal and DICK JEANS stated there is still some objection - the traffic committee did state that they did want some assurance that there will be some control at Nelson Street - also they want some assurance that the pedestrian has a chance on Main and Chestnut - right now they do not feel that he does and they are not sure that the new lights will give the pedestrian any more chance to cross there. Also the people on the west side want some assurance that the 19 meters that they lose will be replaced somewhere else. COUNCILMAN POWELL indicated that there are 12 or 13 that we can get right now. MR. no good. that astaeproblemg lots for both the traffic and the pedestrian. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON stated that we want to move traffic and also want pedestrian safety. that this would be the cnextgNovembertandnthelrespose proposal, was that he was correct. He asked if there would be a problem with a summer survey of the Nelson Street traffic problem with the possibility in the letting of the contract there could be a light installed or added to that proposal and bid if the traffic pattern showed enough or does the Council have to make the complete package with the Highway Department at this time. MR. WIKELIUS stated that they have to have their plans completed during the late summer in order to get them through the process, but they could look at it again this summer although they did look at it during the past summer. THE COUNCIL felt that if they could have seen it late last summer, they would have had a different view of the situation at Nelson and Main Streets. that possibly only looked sa City problem. A CITIZEN felt that possibly the yellow flasher would create more of a problem as the driver may consider the flasher as a caution sign and the pedestrian would step out and he would be creating more of a problem - felt that the stop sign is the answer. COUNCILMAN POWELL felt that we should have a sign down about where the curve is - the forty mile an hour sign - sign saying "PEDESTRIAN IN CROSSWALK HAS THE RIGHT-OF -WAY" - over in Wisconsin they do yield to the pedestrian over there. MAYOR JUNKER questioned the speed of the cars coming into Stillwater and MR. WIKELIUS stated that the design of the proposal gives the driver the feeling of a City street and not on a rural highway as they are cutting down the width and giving the driver more restrictions and if there are pedestrians and cars parked on the road, these things will slow down drivers more than any signs will. January 23, 1979 1 • • • • 1 M • •( 140 January 23, 1979 MAYOR JUNKER asked if the City is not satisfied after two years can they change the whole thing and the reply was "no ". MR. VAN WORMER stated that there is a deadline when the federal funds are going to go and did not know if they would come back the following year to process all of the applications and they might say "forget it ". He stated that there are several things that could be done - one to approve this and let the State to continue to monitor Nelson Street so that nothing is overlooked anything for the Department of Safety and the Retailers might be aware of and the other would be to not approve the plans and have a negative response and also that the City could use Municipal State Aid Funds - there would be some penalties attached to it but did not think it would hurt the City that much. MAYOR JUNKER felt that anything that would be put inti it would be a benefit to the pedestrians especially at Reed's corner and MR. VAN WORMER stated that the way the current signs are, when the green light is on for the west bound traffic, they are currently allowed to torn left onto Main and it is possible to restrict this in the new system and that left turns could only be made when there is a "green left turn arrow" to protect the pedestrian that is crossing from the Poor Butter- fly to Reeds. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked when the curbs would go in and MR. WIKELIUS stated that they would possibly go earlier than the project. COUNCILMAN ROGEi PETERSON asked Duane Elliott about the curbs that were in his proposal for the ? arking lot and MR. ELLIOTT stated that they were just on the east side. MR. ELLIOTT asked about the cost sharing propsective that was shown on the drawing and MR. WIKELIUS stated that there will be some City costs in this also - curbs and the sidewalks. MR. ELLIOTT stated that part of this work is in conjunction with the parking lot improvement and the details of this work could be worked out later. VOTE ON THE MOTION - AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Powell NAYS -- Councilman Roger Peterson (motion carried) NEW BUSINESS 1 a roved Chan Councilman e Order NO 1Peterson, Local seconded lmprovement (sewer Powell, service for pp g- (all in favor) the Leonard Feely home) 2. RESOLUTION for the Metropolitan Land Panning Act Grant was postponed for a future meeting. 3. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the Council approved the official bonds for the City Clerk, rk iDorothy) R. Schnell and City Treasurer, Nile L. Kriesel. 4. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council granted the St. Croix Rivermen Drum & Bugle two band r req of $1,500 from the Band Fund providing that they perform at concerts this summer at Pioneer Park. (all in favor) 5. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 6. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council approved a storage contract with John W. Kunz, 1610 McKusick Lane, Stillwater for the storage of two sweepers for the winter months and approving the signature of Jack Shelton on said contract. (all in favor) INDIVIDUALS- DELEGATIONS - continued None at this time. APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the following Contractor's Licenses were approved: (all in favor Croixland Excavating Excavators Renewal 10003 Mendel Rd. N., Stillwater (continued on page 141) • • a • • • • • • Leo's Excavating Renewal 2275 Neal Ave. N. Stillwater Excavators Midway Sign Co. New 444 Prior Ave. N. St. Paul, Mn. 55104 Sign Erection Mulcahy Drywall 2576 E. 7th Ave., North St. Paul 55109 Plastering, etc. Renewal Quality Drywall R. lll, Stacy 55079 Plastering, etc. New COMMUNICATIONS None CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. The Clerk inquired if the Council would be willing to issue an OFF SALE LIQUOR license to Peter Hall for the basement of the Freighthouse. COUNCILMAN POWELL indicated that they would not issue any more combined licenses but that they would accept an application for just an OFF SALE LICENSE. 2. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council set the date of February 20, 1979 at 7:30 P. M. for the public hearing for Case No. 341 for a Special Use Permit for Richard Iverson, 905 South Third Street for an automotive repair shop at this address. (all in favor) 3. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council granted an Excavator's License to Webster Co., Inc. 845 Edgerton Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 and also approved his License Bond in the amount of $5,000.00. (all in favor) CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council approved an additional compensation increase of $55.00 per month for the Department Heads. (Total increase for 1979 is $125.00) AYES -- Councilmen Harry Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, and Councilman Roger Peterson (motion carried) Nile Kriesel Dorothy Schnell Jack Shelton Ron Niska Dick Blekum Jim Fackler Wally Abrahamson Dave Chial January 23, 1979 1978 1979 $1,550 $1,050 $1,560 $1,200 $1,450 $1,220 $1.730 $1,530 $1,675 $1,175 $1,685 $1,325 $1,575 $1,345 $1,855 $1,655 2. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the Council reconsidered their action to have the City Coordinator to send a letter to the County Commissions regarding the services of the Transporter. (all in favor) 3. of t February h 5th l so that c no further response has been l received r out from them. 4. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Council set the salary for Dorothy R. Schnell for attendance at the Council meetings at $25.00 per meeting effective January 1, 1979 and for each special meeting she is to receive comp -time at the rate of straight time for said meetings. (all in favor) CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT 1. MR. ELLIOTT REPORTED TO THE COUNCIL on Change Order No. 2 on Local Improvement No. 157 - relates to a permit from the Highway Department for the storm sewers - the discharging of the storm sewer into the State Highway ditch at a certain 141 • • • • 1 • • 142 • January 23, 1979 point - the storm sewer was actually and the water was actually on the State right -of -way; otherwise, it would have to be on the Croixgate property and he felt that the City did not want to get involved in easements on that property. He has met with the State several times on this matter and they did bend on the location of this project somewhat. Mr. Elliott showed plat project maps to the City Council and explained the matter in detail. The net result of the change has added $18,000 to the contract -there were bid items on all of these so we do not have to negotiate with the contractor. What this amounts to in assessment basis - there are 190 acres involved in the assessment - adds some $80.00 to the assessments. There is a total of $20,000 on the Change Order; however, on the second page certain items were deleted because of the change and those act as a credit and the net is $18,000. The State holds the cards on the permit and he could not see any alternative. The reason for the change at this time is the change in the hydraulic engineer from the time that the first permit application was made. What the Change Order is requiring the City to do - the whole district is assessed including the Croixgate property - they are suggesting that more of the system be constructed initially than had been proposed. Eventually this would be necessary, but not exactly in that location - that is why they have not proposed it. The other alternative that the Council has - if when you look at the assessments on this project and you feel that it has been unfair to add this to the project at this time, you are not utilizing all of the Municipal State Aid money on this project that the City can - we are utilizing enough State Aid money to keep the level of the assess- ments on the streets at about $4,000 per acre. We are now using about $100,000 eligible State Aid monies - we could request more Municipal State Aid money for the streets - that would bring the street assessment down because the storm sewer assessment has gone up - the net cost per acre would remain the same. That is an option - he was not recommending that - that is an option - once the job is final, then the Council can look at the total cost. Normally on all of the projects they experience an under -run in quantities and therefore, an under -run in costs. Normally a Change Order is not a good situation and he likes to avoid them because it means negotiating with the Contractor. COUNCILMAN PETERSON questioned the footage involved and MR. ELLIOTT explained the drawings. MAYOR JUNRER asked about the permit and MR. ELLIOTT explained that you do not request the permit until you have the contractor - the permit has to list the contractor. inCOUNCILMAN ea f bePETERSON g in asked if an pipeandhMMR. could not ditch will not allow this. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if Croixgate would be assessed for this and he was assured that they would be. He thought that we should talk to them to see if we could go open ditch on their property and see what they have to say. MR. ELLIOTT explained that when the storm sewers are constructed in the Croixgate area it will be assessed against the whole area and this is the difficulty in building improvements piece -meal as this one had to go because of the lack of planning of the Croixgate area. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council approved Change Order No. 2 for Local Improvement No. 157 in the amount of $18,000.00. (all in favor) 2. MR. ELLIOTT DISTRIBUTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL the improvements that have to be made in conjunction with Washington County's improvement of County No. 66 (South Greeley Street) - that improvement is planned for receipt of bids in March of this year by the County - there was a decision on a request from John Ogren for the extension of 63rd Street west of County 66 to a point of about 400 feet to the west. It is recommended that it be included as there are inter- related drainage problems. There are parts of this that are Township properties and it requires that the Township have a concurrent hearing if this Council elects to have a hearing on the County 66 improvements as there are some cost sharing factors relating to this - the cost sharing items are sidewalks, curb and gutter, easements, storm sewer and a stare of the storm sewer pipe on County Road 66. He made reference to page 6 of the Feasibility Study - Table No. 1 - The storm sewer constructed by Stillwater Township by the Somerset Systems is inadequate in size and there is no way to make it work in the overall system that he is proposing, and that outlet pipe has to be replaced. With all of the other piping in this street, there is no way to get this pipe under County 66. The cost of the outlet is $48,820 and it has to be determined how that is to be shared with the County and the properties abutting County 66 and those west of County No. 66, and made e to pages 6 ad 8 of the report. reference to i and • • • wl • • January 23, 1979 r • • 0 The County will pay for fifty percent of the storm sewer and 50% to be borne by the people on County No. 66 - that is the storm sewer in a southerly direction of 63rd Street. The storm outlet share $3,417.00 - and made reference to the various footnotes in the report. Mr. Elliott had talked to Dennis at the Water Department about the mains off Greeley Street that are needed and a stub at Orleans Street in a westerly direction $3,100.00 and he recommended that that amount be temporarily be borne by the Wacer Boar dand later could be assessed when the improvement southwest of Orleans and County Road occurs. MAYOR JUNKER questioned the sewer for this area and he was informed that it is a private service for the apartments that are in that area. The total of the project is $72,647.00. MR. ELLIOTT detailed the assessments to the abutting property owners for this improvement as detailed in the report. The improvements on 63rd Street would be 100% assessed to John Ogren's property in the amount of $59,370.00 (street, watermain, sewer and water services). He was the sole petitioner and the hearing could be waived on this, but it was recommended that he join in with other work in the area. The bigger problem is the problem with West County 66 drainage - he stated that they have been waiting for the Baytown Board to act on one issue that relates to the pipe to the Oasis Pond. Eighty acres of Baytown drains from the south under Trunk Highway 212 thru a 24 inch corrugated pipe west of Greeley Street and talking with the State Highway Department he stated that Baytown Township was talking about enlarging that pipe in the future, and they would cooperate with them if they paid for it. The Baytown Township Board took the action of January 9th not to put any more water into Stillwter than currently can get under the highway in the pipe that exists, which was originally designed for agricultural drainage which means that if they improve property and have more run -off, they will pond it on their side of the highway. The normal level of that pond (Oasis) will be 911 and in the case of a storm go up to 916 which will not adversely affect the valuable property to the west and the pipe leading out will be only 12 inches. There is a pipe going westerly to pick up the drain- age from the Robert Moore Project, Local Improvement No. 129 - this will pick up the water near Feely's house. There ig another pond to the north near 63rd Street, a needed pond by the DNR especially with Commercial and Industrial development. They must put in the 36 inch storm sewer under 63rd Street and the watermain and services - the storm sewer referred to as the West County 66 drainage gets fairly costly. - that will have to be assessed against the total area. MAYOR JUNKER asked why are we taking all of the water from the pond by Country Kitchen & running it into Lily Lake and have us pump it and MR. ELLIOTT stated that it goes in there right now - it gets there by a ditch in 63rd Street right now and with the improvement it will get there by a pipe. There is 88 acres of Baytown Township and all of the other area to the west of Greeley Street. The pipe will only change the rate of getting there - the volume always gets there - this area was never assessed for storm sever - there was no storm sewer with the other project. As development continues to develop in the watershed, it is true that the runoff from the parcels of land is almost double as to the amount of waterthat will run -off. MAYOR JUNKER questioned putting in a 36 inch pipe - the engineer must expect a lot of water and MR. ELLIOTT explained that if there were a 15 inch pipe put in what would happen is that they would flood when it rains and this flow is based on a storm that would occur once in ten years. The pipe under 66th Street would also be a 36 inch pipe - there are some other storm sewers going west to an unknownlocation - these are part of Don Rippel's plan. We are talking of having to improve the outlet that goes by Somerset Systems if the County Road improve- ment goes ahead - he knew of no other way for that outlet to be shared other than by apportionate areas that go into it - the County said that they will pay for their area - there is an area along County 66. Who shold pay for the pipe which will cost $48,000 - the vast majority of the drainge is the area west of County No. 66 - it is possible to have the hearing and assess only that $48,000 to the area west of County 66 and leave all of these storm sewers for a second day, but the problem is that the Council will be talking to the same people five years from now with another storm sewer improvement in an area which they will say they have already paid for. Looking at the district west of County 66 to achieve a single contour assessment against the property and then you are done. The only way that the "dashed" storm sewers on the maps can be accomplished is more or less by trading dollars by assessing a portion of the street and getting Municipal State Money from the State Aid Fund and applying that to the storm sewers. He suggested that the area west of County 66 goes ahead at this time in conjunction with the outlet and in conjunction with the improvement of County 66 - it will not be necessary to ever go back against that area and talk about a storm sewer assessment again. Mr. Elliott or the Township Engineer will have to be standing • s 143 • • • • • 144 January 23, 1979 before the Stillwater Town Board telling their people that they should get involved in the improvement which the Township has never participated in because they are considered rural in nature and never participated in a curb and gutter or a piece of storm sewer - they are in for a rude awakening he thought - there is a pipe in the ground that is inadequate - it is 27 inches in diameter and the change from 27 to 36 is a substantial change - the design is based upon the zoning - there are going to be parking lots - there are going to buildings or it might go multi- family or type of apartment buildings. MAYOR JUNKER asked about the amount of the assessments and MR. ELLIOTT stated that the commercial property along County 66 would share to the extent of about $23.00 per front foot. The Ogren improvement would be totalling assessed against 0g.en and the City has only a right of entry to put the sanitary sewer in on that property and he strongly recommended that condemnation proceedings start right now for the right -of -way for that roadway. He felt that the land ought to be appraised based upon its )wn value - it is not an easy project. There is to be one siewalk and it would be on the west side. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON asked about the level of the pipe for the outlet of the pond and MR. ELLIOTT stated that it will be at the 911 level rather than the 916.5 and that is where it is now. He also asked about the level of the other pond to the north as to whether or not it could overflow and he was informed that there is a 36 inch pipe going out of the pond below - the outlet pipes are much smaller than the inlet pipes. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked about the condemnation proceedings as to what they would be for and MR. ELLIOTT stated it would he for 63rd Street from Greeley Street west. He stated that 63rd Street is a Municipal State Aid Street and that State monies could be used for acquiring the right -of -way, and when the right - of -way is acquired and the street is constructed there is a portion of it that would be assessed to the property - the street itself is $41,000 of that $59,000. MAOR ELLLIOTT Usttaateds if directlyeandni and it would involved Ogren and possibly Feely and condemnation proceedings would have to start on that - they had included an estimated cost for the pond. He was not certain how the hearing was being "handled because it involves a County Road improvement - part of which is the outlet pipe. On the other hand if this Council would say "let's put the burden of all that pipe problem on the County 66 Improvement ", he felt they could be objections from people who have businesses on thato 66 not es their Reofeltnthaththeyishould all be here at the same time. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if the Township would not have to be included in the hearing as we are assessing Township property and MR. ELLIOTT stated that we cannot assess Township property unless they hold a hearing and agree to this and they assess their people. He said that Stillwater could have their hearing, but not vote the improvement until the City is certain they will go along with this. MR. MAGNUSON indicated that there could be a joint hearing - MR. ELLIOTT indicated that if the Council agrees to go ahead on the project, it could be contingent on the Township doing the same thing and he felt that everyone should be invited to the hearing On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "SETTING THE HEARING DATE FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 171 (County 66 - South Greeley Street Improve- ments) for March 6, 1979 9:00 P. M." and that the Township be advised to be a part of this hearing. AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker (see resolutions) NAYS- -None PUBLIC WORKS No report COMMITTEE REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY ---MR. ki g stated received a going Simonet ng north. COUNCILMAN POWELL requested that the Public Safety Department check it out and come back to the Council with a recommendation at a future meeting. n L • a • • • • January 23, 1979 r • • • PARKS AND RECREATION No report ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE No report CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT MR. MAGNUSON reported to the City Council on the status of the Nelson School property. RTR has amended their complaint to include a charge under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act in which the historical resource is threatened with impairment or destruction and that the owner has to show that he has exhausted every feasible alternative to that alteration or destruction and the hearing will be held on Thursday at one o'clock. The Judge will determine from the records that are before her whether or not the Nelson School is a historical resource and she will probably decide that it is. Last fall the City did take action to have the Nelson School put on the National Registry as a historical building and from the records it is pretty hard to argue the case and what that means is that instead of just being faced with making a reasonable decision on what to do with it, that the City will now have to prove to the judge and anyone else that in order to tear it down they will have to eliminate and exhaust all possible feasible and alt ernatives to tearing it down. He felt that this changes the test - it changes the burden on the City to find something else and if they decide that there is nothing else besides tearing it down, and have a real good record showing that they listened to engineers and architects and businessmen and people who are in the business of renovating - will have to have testimony before them that there are no alternatives - no feasible alternatives - no prudent alternative is available before they made a decision to tear it down. He thought what the judge would do is to remand the issue providing that she finds that it is a historical resource - remand the thing to the City Council for further investigation and further findings either there is no feasible prudent alternatives or the Council would like to proceed to try it and take more effort to find prudent alternatives. MRS. THERESA SCHAFFER asked if they were going to let it stand for two mcre years and do nothing with it - the Council sold it once - how can they sell it again? MR. MAGNUSON explained that there is a temporary injunction in effect preventing the City from transferring that to Dick Kilty - it is a judge's order and we can't go ahead with that. What she will do is to remand it to the City Council for further investigation and she will continue that injunction in effect. It is entirely a political decision - if the Mayor and Council have made up their minds lO,O% that they want that building destroyed, then it is up to the Council to make a record to show through our minutes and witnesses that we have before us that there is no alternative to tearing it down and then when the judge looks at that, she can see and we can prove to her that there has been every alternative looked at and nothing seems prudent. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that the sale never took place because of the judge's order - the injunction stopping it. MR. MAGNUSON stated that he had the papers from Red Wing and in that case the City allowed them a permit to tear the houses down,but the Mayor was against it so he brought an action against Erickson on it under the same law and in that case the judge found that the rowhouses are historically valued resources - he also found there was no feasible or prudent alternative for the demolition of the row - houses. MRS. MARY EMANUELSON felt that changing it to condominiums would take away from it when it is used for housing - how could it be a historical resource when it is going to be used for housing. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON felt that the same thing could apply to the Courthouse which is being used for shops and MRS. EMANUELSON did not feel that it was the same thing as the whole inside is going to have to be ripped out and rebuilt from scratch - the only thing that will stay the same is the outside and there has to be new windows all the way through. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON stated that by the same token the Freighthouse is not being used as a freighthouse and it is on the National Registry - it is a restaurant. MRS. SCHAFFER stated that this is not a commercial area - it is a residential area and COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that historical sifnificance would pertain no matter where the building is located. 145 • • • 146 • January 23, 1979 MR. MAGNUSON asked if any members of the Council had any direction on how they feel about this - he would like to know. MAYOR court with that idea and have different. should COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON stated that he did not v me on it, but that it was his feeling at this time and that the court has to give the City their instruc- tions - if she awards the sale in effect and continues the injunction, then it is back in the City's lap. MAYOR JUNKER stated that is what the City would like her to do - give it back to the City Council so that they can get it on the ball - the City doesn't want it sitting there another two years waiting for somebody to do something with it. COUNCILMAN ROGER PERERSON stated that if you are going to build a case that is what you are going to have. MR. MAGNUSON did not feel that way - you could have two hearings and you could have everybody under the sun come and testify and within a month you could be right back in the courthouse with the records and he did not feel that it would take that long. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that by the same token the others could have the same type of evidence and MR. MAGNUSON agreed and that it would then go to trial and the same laws would apply to the Scotty's case in Minneapolis. MAYOR JUNKER felt that we should make them give us a decision on way or the other - if they tell us that we can't tear it down and that you have to go a different way - or we can tear it down. MR. MAGNUSON stated that there is some question as to whether or not we should file an affidavit of prejudice against her - but actually he felt that she was pretty fair. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICR questioned the number of taxicab licenses that are avail- able. QUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES None ORDINANCES None RESOLUTIONS - The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adopted: 1. Directing the Payment of the Bills. 2. Relating to $700,000 Commercial Bonds - Cub Market 3. Ordering the Plans for the 212 Frontage Road 4. Change in the Hooley Sub- Division Plat 5. Ordering the Hearing on Local Improvement No. 168 - North Harriet Street Sewer 6. Minnesota Cities Day 7. Ordering the Hearing on County Road No. 66 - South Greeley Street 8. Vacation of a Portion of South Fourth Street - South of Myrtle Street (repass) ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the meeting adjourned at 10.25 P. M. Attest: <t✓ .� ! , /, euvii City &erk Mayor to- • • • • 4 •